Based on the little poll/Electoral College Vote tracker on the home page of the LA Times (scroll down on the right sideóno membership needed because of the pop-up), I think this next election could be even closer in electoral votes than the last one: perhaps a tie! <br><br>FWIW, I colored my states based the interactive map based on my own intuition based on the available poll numbers and the state's own voting history. My 2004 map differed from the 2000 map on New Hampsire (4 votes) and West Virginia (5 votes) which gives us 269/269 instead of 260dem/278rep votes.<br><br>A tie more or less guarantees W the slot unless the incoming representatives change the makeup of the Republican-dominated House (not likely). It would be most interesting in that situation to see who the Senate (currently 48dem/51rep/1ind) would vote in for VP. T'would make for an interesting election year.<br><br>

BTW, has there ever been an electoral tie before? I seems to remember seeing different-partied Pres and VP getting the seats somewhere along the line when looking at a reference list in college, but can't remember if it was do to a House and Senate vote to get them there or if it was for another reason (or if my recollection is wrong altogether).<br><br>

This November, there will likely be an initiative on the ballot in Colorado to distribute its nine electoral votes proportionally according to the percentages of the statewide popular vote. This could present a whole new "what if?".<br><br>If it comes down to a squeaker, please, puh-leeeeeez, don't let it be Florida again.<br><br><br><br><br>

But if it's on the ballot to be voted on in November, won't it not be implemented until after this election? The electoral college casts its votes pretty soon after the popular votes for the state are tallied, no?<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>BTW, has there ever been an electoral tie before?<p><hr></blockquote><p>to answer my own question:<br><br><blockquote>Proponents of the Electoral College claim that critics exaggerate the risks in our present system, pointing to the very small number of occasions where their concerns have come to fruition. Only two elections in our history were ever decided in the House and none since 1825. The Electoral College system also reduces the possibility of voter fraud; in a direct national election votes could be bought anywhere, even in heavily concentrated Democratic or Republican states where under the present system, few would bother to attempt such a thing. In addition, while small states may be overrepresented under the present system, under any other alternatives smaller states would virtually be ignored. Most importantly, supporters of the Electoral College would add that it is a tried and true system, one that is efficient, identifies a winner quickly, and avoids recounts. For these reasons, Americans would be foolish to risk experimenting with a new one.<br><br>Citizens and lawmakers have been generating ideas and engaging in debates about the Electoral College for two centuries, with the most recent resurgence occurring after the election of 2000. The question is whether this pattern will continue, or can lawmakers craft a clear and compelling plan that will generate the kind of political and public support necessary to affect a constitutional amendment. History has demonstrated that it is more realistic to expect the present system to endure, as each reform idea works to the advantage or disadvantage of a different interested and vocal group.</blockquote><br><br>

Interesting. It puts CA as "weak Kerry" and OR as "strong Kerry" whereas the poll source for LA Times shows CA as a strong Kerry state and OR as up for grabs still.<br><br>Plus your site refers to some states as being "strong Bush" states. {tee hee, giggle giggle}<br><br>

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.